JUDGMENT Ms. Nirmaljit Kaur, J.: (Oral) - This is a revision petition against the judgment and order dated 12.08.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon, as well as, the order dated 08.09.2011 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide which, the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. 2. Vide these two orders, the only relief granted to the respondent-wife was that the daughter of the petitioner be got admitted in the school, in which she had passed her IXth class and the petitioner being the father was directed to pay money towards the fees. 3. The only argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, while impugning the order passed under Section 12 read with Sections 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of the Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was that he is suffering from various diseases and he is unable to pay the fees and that his wife, too, was working. 4. The petitioner had not disputed that he is running the business of Property Dealer at Gurgaon. As per the findings of the Courts below, the bank statement of the petitioner shows that in the year 2008-09, he had deposited more than Rs.50 lacs in his bank account. 5. The daughter is the only child of the petitioner. She has completed her IXth standard in the said School. There is no reason as to why the petitioner, who is the father, should not be made responsible to pay the fee towards the education of her daughter. The petitioner cannot escape from the said liability. The fact that the respondent-mother is also working, has no merit as the present orders, under challenge, do not provide any maintenance to the wife. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that in another case, maintenance has been granted to the wife as well. However, the said order is not before this Court. 6. No other ground was raised. 7. Dismissed accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------